Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes:
> On 27.03.2013 18:10, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 27 March 2013 15:35, Heikki Linnakangas<hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote:
>>> Ok, cool. Can you please revert this commit so that we can move on, then?
>> Please explain why you want this reverted, without mentioning the
>> other task we agree is required.
> If an admin can't trust that the file is placed in $PGDATA, it's harder
> to determine if a server is a master or a standby. It makes tools that
> try to promote / demote a server more complicated, because they need to
> take this setting into account. Lastly, it breaks the new pg_basebackup
> -R functionality; pg_basebackup will create the recovery.conf file, but
> it won't take effect.
FWIW, I agree that this is a bad idea and should be reverted.
Simon is claiming that because he described this idea in one sentence
(out of a larger post) three months ago, everyone agreed to the idea and
there is no longer any room for discussion. In reality I suspect nobody
really thought about the implications at the time. In any case, the
arguments that have been made today seem to me to be sufficient reasons
why we *don't* want to put recovery.conf in random places outside the
data directory.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
